The SitePoint Forums have moved.

You can now find them here.
This forum is now closed to new posts, but you can browse existing content.
You can find out more information about the move and how to open a new account (if necessary) here.
If you get stuck you can get support by emailing forums@sitepoint.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

It's probably not the processing part which takes long, but the review process. They have a lot of people looking at sites to see if they're OK (supposedly) but the 'editor' only has to enter a few fields in a database somewhere.

Those people do reviews from home. When they are in a good mood they allow people into the directory. If they just spilt their coffee, then I pity the person that owns the site that is just about the be reviewed. Just kidding on this of course... I hope.

A TV documentary showed over 120 people working in an office
some where in USA. I highly doubt it. They can get the job done by contractors in Far east or South America for one tenth of what they pay to American workers.

I believe that Yahoo!'s bizexpress department is actually rather small. Well, that's the impression I got when I called them, anyway. The person on the other end of the line was like, "Oh, hold on, let me get the person in charge of that". Two seconds later, I was supposedly speaking to the person in charge of it.

As for being a DMOZ editor.. funny you should mention that. I applied for an empty spot, filled out a complete application with what I felt was more than plenty in terms of experience/background, and still got rejected. With no explanation, either. I was kinda peeved.

Yahoo should be supervising their reviewers but with so many sites submitted no one can review each reviewer's work.

There was a problem on Looksmart last year where an editor gave a very degrading and one-sided "review" of a site (a hunting/shooting club's web site). That description sat on the Looksmart database for several months until a massive email campaign to the company finally got it changed. In the mean time the decription was IMHO very slanderous and libelous. Clearly no one was 1) checking the reviewers work and 2) really cared until thousands of complains came in.

Makes you wonder how many sites don't get listed at all just because the reviewer doesn't agree with the subject matter or other subjective factors......